Just to post an example of the internet fallacy:I googled "inbreeding insects social ant"
Clicked on the first link and viola:
Lack of inbreeding avoidance in the Argentine ant Linepithema humile
Took me three minutes including the 0.29 seconds for google.
Did you read the article to determine why it was written. The authors said:
"The aim of this study was to determine whether genetic cues can be used to discriminate kin from non-kin within colonies as a means to avoid inbreeding".
They then say:
"As in most other animals, inbreeding is probably detrimental and rare in ants and other eusocial Hymenoptera (Crozier, 1980; Crozier et al., 1984; Pamilo, 1983; Ross and Carpenter, 1991; Ross and Fletcher, 1986). Dispersal is probably the primary mechanism preventing inbreeding. In most ants, winged males and females emerge from many nests simultaneously and undergo large mating flights before mating, thus greatly decreasing the probability of close relatives contacting one another (Baudry et al., 1998; Crozier, 1980)."
The article concludes that, in their tests,
Linepithema humile did not use genetic cues as a means to avoid inbreeding. That does not mean that
L. humile prefers inbreeding or that it is desireable. It just wasn't avoided by genetic cues.
Linepithema humile colonies are made up of many queens and do not have mating flights. Mating takes place in the nest and new colonies are formed by budding.
Here is another quote from the article:
"It is important to note, however, that the selective pressure to avoid sib-matings might not be very strong in our study population because colonies contain a high number of queens (Keller et al., 1989), leading to a relatively low probability of sib-mating even if matings would occur randomly between sexuals. Selection for a mechanism preventing sib-mating is presumably higher in native populations (Argentina and Brazil) where queen number per colony is frequently much lower than in introduced French populations (Pedersen J, Giraud T, and Keller L, unpublished data)."
If you read the text, the article does not promote you point of view.
Scott